A response to Kelly Scoles’ letter:

Hi again, Kelly. Thanks for another challenge.

I really didn’t want to get into a discussion about our Supreme Court justices. The cerebral shocks I have received watching the scandalous treatment of so many Republican nominees to the High Court challenges my objectivity. My first experience with these infamous Democratic Party ship worms began with the rejection of Judge Robert Bork in 1987.

Bork was an eminent legal scholar, Yale professor of law, and Reagan appointee to several Senate affirmed positions.
“Bork had a considerable reputation as a conservative law scholar and a proponent of originalism, the legal theory that the Constitution should be interpreted as originally intended by the Founders and Founding generation” the same as Justice Scalia. Bork also taught at Yale University. Among his Yale Law students were Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Is this all beginning to sound familiar?

President Reagan nominated Bork for the Supreme Court on July 1, 1987, to replace a retiring Lewis Powell. Senator Ted Kennedy reacted with a public statement that quickly drew political battle lines over Bork’s nomination.
“Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists would be censored at the whim of government, and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is often the only protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy,” he said. (Bork later stated that he felt every word in the statement was false.)
Bork’s opponents were critical of his opinions about the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision. Bork’s testimony was also broadcast on live television. The Senate Judiciary Committee, led by then-Senator Joseph Biden (always into the rot), decided to send Bork’s nomination to the floor with a recommendation that it be rejected.

Bork responded: “Federal judges are not appointed to decide cases according to the latest opinion polls,” he said, adding that if judicial candidates “are treated as political candidates the effect will be to erode public confidence and endanger the independence of the judiciary.”

Judge Bork passed away at the age of 85 in 2012.

Borks treatment by Democrats was so savage that a word is named for him in the Oxford English Dictionary. “The verb “bork” is used as slang, to ‘defame or vilify (a person) systematically, esp. in the mass media, usually with the aim of preventing his or her appointment to public office; to obstruct or thwart (a person) in this way.’”

Bork’s treatment was not just a one-time Democratic Party event. This sort of political defamation, used for sabotaging Republican nominees, is policy, showcased during the past 60-years. I remember the Bork attack clearly and see this same tactic in the attacks upon Clarence Thomas, Brett M. Kavanaugh, Neil M. Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett at their nomination hearings. Worthy of special note here was the outrageous criminal threat by Senator Schumer: “Sen. Chuck Schumer’s Supreme Court tirade is a symptom of America’s democratic decline.” By Ian Millhiser

No Democrat had the guts to condemn Schumer’s criminal threats against Supreme Court Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch: “I want to tell you Gorsuch. I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” Schumer broadcast this threat from the steps of the Supreme Court building by microphone in 2020, demonstrating how Democrats are all from the same communistic-socialistic-atheistic mold. They remain without honor. Schumer should have been arrested, tried, and jailed. “On October 23, 1987, the United States Senate held one of the most-controversial votes on a Supreme Court nominee in its history, when it rejected Robert Bork’s appointment.”

“After the Judiciary Committee declined to recommend Bork in a full Senate vote, the nominee voiced his frustrations with a nomination process that he thought had turned into a political litmus test for the Supreme Court.” A great man was dishonored. The same Democrat tactic was used against Clarence Thomas, who described the treatment as a "High tech lynching". Remember the Anita Hill setup? Then there was the outrage of the Kavanaugh hearings, where someone named Christine Blasey Ford falsely alleged that as a teenager in the early 1980s, Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her during a party; a charge totally without proof. The history of Democratic party-political defamation is clear. That party is a fifth column for radical political subversion. Like flies on animal excrement, the Democratic Party judiciary minions plague our justice system today: Fani Willis, Arthur F. Engoron, Juan Merchan, Tanya Chutkan, Letitia James, Alvin Bragg, and the band goes on. Oh – for Ketanji Brown Jackson: the answer to the “woman” question is: they have two X chromosomes, and lack the Y.
(Had to cut short for time)